Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup

The Week That Was: 2012-12-08 (December 8, 2012)

Brought to You by SEPP (www.SEPP.org) The Science and Environmental Policy Project

###################################################

Quote of the Week: “No known mode of natural climate variability can cause sustained, global-scale warming of the troposphere and cooling of the lower stratosphere.” By Benjamin Santer

###################################################

Number of the Week: Between 8 inches (0.2 meters) and 6.6 feet (2.0 meters), with 90% certainty.

###################################################

The Science & Environmental Policy Project (SEPP) is a 501-c-3 organization, incorporated in Virginia. Its FID# is 54-1645372 and donations are tax deductable. SEPP pays no salaries, and does not solicit support from corporations or government agencies. It depends upon contributions from private donors.

THIS WEEK:

Doha Over? As of this writing it appears that the 18th Annual Conference of Parties (COP 18) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in Doha, Qatar, ended its two-week session to try to reach an agreement for the control of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions to replace the expiring Kyoto Protocol. It ended in an all too typical 24 hour negotiating marathon in which it appears little was accomplished except to do it again. The Kyoto Protocol was extended to 2020 for the countries that agreed. (Details are not yet clear.)

The Green political groups, partially funded by the US government, criticized the lack of progress (read economic penalties self-inflected on wealthy countries). China and India would have none of this blood-letting. The UK taxpayers appear to be big losers with Ed Davey, the Climate Change Secretary, agreeing to some deal that will commit Britain to spending billions of pounds, part of which will go to subsidize inferior sources of electricity in Africa under some green fund with details to follow. No doubt, few of the claimed benefits will actually be delivered to those who need it the most.

Of course, the alarmists claim a deal must be struck immediately because their science states that unless carbon dioxide emissions are limited, the end is near. Their science does not consider the fact that the HadCRU surface temperatures show no global warming trend in 16 years. Do not let facts to get in the way of ideological belief! The touching moment came when the Philippine climate change commissioner fought back tears when claiming the typhoon that hit the Philippines was exacerbated by global warming / climate change. Simply because he believes it so does not make it so. The cyclone data contradict his claims.

With usual aplomb, Christopher Monckton commandeered a microphone during a break and announced to the climate change diplomats that nature is not obeying their science and their models. He was quickly escorted out of the room and his credentials seized. The pompous do not care to be reminded of their ignorance.

In the run-up to Doha, numerous organizations made outrageous predictions of the extent of global warming / climate change if CO2 emissions are not controlled. An informal survey shows that the World Bank was the winner of the most outlandish prize. The Bank claimed that temperatures will rise by 4 degrees C (7.2F) in about fifty years (as early as the 2060s). Also the Bank claimed that the Arab world would suffer the most. This was politically very appropriate, because the conference was being held in part of the Arab world.

However, its claims demonstrate that the World Bank’s climate experts are apparently ignorant of climate history. According to H.H. Lamb, during the period of about 5500 to 8000 years ago the Sahara was wet and populated with elephants, hippopotami, crocodiles, etc. Subsequent archeological research shows cultures relying on agriculture, including dairy. The Northern Hemisphere, if not the world, was warmer during this period. The tropical rains that brought life giving water failed as the hemisphere cooled. But why consider messy climate history, when you have a beautiful, unvalidated, computer model? Please see links under Challenging the Orthodoxy, Defending the Orthodoxy, Dire Doha, and Communicating Better to the Public – Make things up.

*******************

The State of the Earth: Craig Idso, of CO2 Science, and a lead author of the reports of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) titled Climate Change Reconsidered, just published a lengthy report: The State of Earth’s Terrestrial Biosphere: How is it Responding to Rising Atmospheric CO2 and Warmer Temperatures? Using hundreds of empirical studies, the report refutes the claims of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is stressing natural plants and human agriculture by reducing plant growth and development.

Over the past few decades, plants are growing robustly thanks to increases in atmospheric CO2 concentrations. Plants should be able to adapt to increasing temperatures, assuming the IPCC models are correct, and increase water use efficiency. Increasing CO2 concentrations are a boon to agriculture and humanity, not the threat the IPCC claims. The report categorizes the studies by continents and identifies countries such as China by natural category (grasslands, deserts, etc.). Over the past 50 years, the net carbon uptake has doubled and there is no evidence that the uptake will decline from rising temperatures.

The report is a valuable, empirical contribution on the effects of carbon dioxide emissions. One wonders how many “climate experts” in organizations such as the World Bank will read such a report. Please see links under Challenging the Orthodoxy.

*******************

The New AGU: Reports from the annual meeting of the American Geophysical Union (AGU) indicates that the new executive director of the AGU, Chris McEntee, is leading the venerable institution directly into politics and targeting those members of Congress who are skeptical about the IPCC version of global warming / climate change. This is unfortunate because it may prove to be disastrous for American science if the IPCC is wrong, as TWTW asserts. It is a path of a new form of Lysenkoism that proved to be destructive for Soviet biological science.

One is reminded of the statement by Jane Lubchenco, the current Administrator of NOAA, made in her lecture as retiring president of AAAS: “Urgent and unprecedented environmental and social changes challenge scientists to define a new social contract…a commitment on the part of all scientists to devote their energies and talents to the mostpressing problems of the day, in proportion to their importance, in exchange for public funding.” [Boldface added]. Making false claims about science will surely reduce government funding of science eventually.

*******************

The New Fingerprint? The quote of the week comes from Benjamin Santer, who is lead author of a new paper claiming to have discovered a new distinct human fingerprint of late 20th century warming. The old Santer fingerprint was the claimed human caused warming trend in the atmosphere above the tropics, which was found in the climate models. However, as reported by Douglass, Christy, Pearson, and Singer, weather balloon data of measurements at the appropriate altitudes and latitudes failed to show the pronounced warming trend. NIPCC 2008 Fig 10: http://www.sepp.org/publications/NIPCC_final.pdf

Without going into details of the research, the statement has significant problems. It is a classic in Argumentum ad ignoraniam (an appeal to ignorance). I cannot think of any other explanation, so my conclusion must be correct.

As discussed in recent TWTWs, hindcasting, fitting the climate models to historic data is fraught with uncertainty. The internal uncertainty in the models allows them to be fitted to significantly varying data. In the past, surface data was used. Now, satellite data is used. Yet, there is a significant variance between surface data and satellite data that the climate establishment largely ignores. The method of hindcasting is roughly analogous to pouring warm gelatin into a mold. It will fit whatever mold one chooses.

In the past the IPCC has largely ignored the satellite data and relied on surface data. Further, the satellite data shows little or no warming trend from 1979 to the late 1990s, then a jump, followed by a no warming trend for over a decade. Needless to say, the relationship between atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations and temperatures is weak. An additional issue is that the satellite record clearly shows that the warming is concentrated in the northern part of the Northern Hemisphere and hardly global.

According to the reports, the new research will be a scientific core to the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (AR-5), due out in 2013 and 2014. It will be interesting. Please see links under Defending the Orthodoxy.

*******************

Oil Spill and Consequences: Several studies were released questioning the value of dispersants that were used in the BP Gulf Oil Spill. According to the first study, injecting the dispersants directly into the well was unnecessary and provided no real benefit. According to the second study mixing dispersants with oil greatly increased the toxicity of the oil. An additional important area of research would be studying microbes for use in future events as well as comprehending the speed of recovery after the use of dispersants. Please see links under Oil Spills, Gas Leaks & Consequences.

*******************

Grid Costs of Renewables: The OECD Nuclear Energy Agency released a study of the costs of introducing erratic renewables, such solar and wind, onto an electrical grid system made up of reliable sources of electricity (coal, gas and nuclear) which are termed as dispatchable technologies. The findings should give pause to those who are considering the merits of different types.

“The study considers six technologies in detail: nuclear, coal, gas, onshore wind, offshore wind and solar. It finds that the so-called dispatchable technologies – coal, gas and nuclear – have system costs of less than $3 per MWh, while the system costs for renewables can reach up to $40 per MWh for onshore wind, $45 per MWh for offshore wind and $80 per MWh for solar. The costs for renewables vary depending on the country, technology and penetration levels, with higher system costs for greater penetration of renewables.” Please see link under Energy Issues – Non-US.

*******************

Number of the Week: Between 8 inches (0.2 meters) and 6.6 feet (2.0 meters), with 90% certainty. “Global sea level rise has been a persistent trend for decades. It is expected to continue beyond the end of this century, which will cause significant impacts in the United States. Scientists have very high confidence (greater than 90% chance) that global mean sea level will rise at least 8 inches (0.2 meter) and no more than 6.6 feet (2.0 meters) by 2100.” From: the NOAA Climate Program Office.

Actual global sea level rise has been ongoing for about 180 centuries – far longer than a persistent trend for decades. NOAA appears to be adopting the disinformation of James Hansen who predicts 6 meters (19.7 feet) of rise, but along a strongly exponential curve with most of the rise in the last few decades of the century. It is impossible to prove him wrong for many years. Is this what EPA is thinking with it declares to Federal judges that it is 90 to 99% certain about its science? Please see link under Communicating Better to the Public – Exaggerate, or be Vague?

###################################################

ARTICLES:

For the numbered articles below please see this week’s TWTW at: http://www.sepp.org. The articles are at the end of the pdf.

Anyone who’d like to argue that the world is experiencing a “new normal” with respect to tropical cyclones is simply mistaken. Over the past 4 years, the world is actually in the midst of a very low period in tropical cyclone landfalls — at least as measured over the past 43 years.

Renewable subsidies in 2011, including biofuels, amounted to $88 billion, the International Energy Agency in Paris said Nov. 12. Over the period to 2035, they need to amount to $4.8 trillion, over half of which has already been committed to existing projects or needed to meet 2020 targets, it said.

It is obvious to see that sea level rise has slowed down significantly. In view of the relatively short time frame in which the measurements have been made, it should not be speculated on whether the deceleration in the rise is a trend change or if it is only noise. What is certain is that there is neither a ‘dramatic’ rise, nor an ‘acceleration’. Conclusion: Climate models that project an acceleration over the last 20 years are wrong.”

[SEPP Comment: Efforts to blend erratic sources of electricity generation with those that work when needed. The erratic sources reduce revenues to the reliable ones, thus the reliable ones will not be replaced when needed.]

“However, the extent to which more recent regulatory actions have benefited public health remains in question. This study provides strong and compelling evidence that continuing to reduce ambient levels of PM2.5 prolongs life,”

[SEPP Comment: A seven year period is far too short to evaluate the benefits new regulations. There is little issue that the limiting of airborne particles since the 1920s have benefited health. The issue is the value of the latest increments to those regulations.]

Environmental Industry

A fanatical and self-righteous green religion stalks Britain. Now it wants to evangelise the Third World

IF 16 years of lack of warming turns into 17 years, what will Santer say?

“A single decade of observational TLT data is therefore inadequate for identifying a slowly evolving anthropogenic warming signal. Our results show that temperature records of at least 17 years in length are required for identifying human effects on global-mean tropospheric temperature. ”http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2011/2011JD016263.shtml

“The LLNL-led research shows that climate models can and do simulate short, 10- to 12-year “hiatus periods” with minimal warming, even when the models are run with historical increases in greenhouse gases and sulfate aerosol particles. They find that tropospheric temperature records must be at least 17 years long to discriminate between internal climate noise and the signal of human-caused changes in the chemical composition of the atmosphere.”https://www.llnl.gov/news/newsreleases/2011/Nov/NR-11-11-03.html

————————-

“The multimodel average tropospheric temperature trends are outside the 5–95 percentile range of RSS results at most latitudes. The likely causes of these biases include forcing errors in the historical simulations (40–42), model response errors (43), remaining errors in satellite temperature estimates (26, 44), and an unusual manifestation of internal variability in the observations (35, 45). These explanations are not mutually exclusive. Our results suggest that forcing errors are a serious concern.”http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/11/28/1210514109.full.pdf

No known mode of natural climate variability can cause sustained, global-scale warming of the troposphere and cooling of the lower stratosphere.” By Benjamin Santer

This is the Ben Santer who in Gleckler et al 2012 found SST rise was a massive, massive 0.125 C in fifty years. Due to that evil foul gas CO2! And all due to foul evil humans! That is so massive (gasp!) it corresponds a 2XCO2 all of 0.4 C!!! Wow, at that rate we WILL fry for our sins!

In 2013 we will face a large number of proposed EPA regulations that will do little for the environment but will certainly retard or even stop economic growth.
———–
Actually I can’t think of any historical precedent to justify this statement. On the other hand we do known that bad banking practices can stop the economy in its tracks. Maybe SEPP should repurpose itself to fight against bad banking practices.,

This unscientific, nay anti-scientific, attitude is precisely the same as that or intelligent design advocates who argue that any biological feature they can’t explain must have been specially created by God. Ideology-based lack of curiosity kills science.